REPORT TO COUNCIL
SUBJECT
Title
Discussion of Safe Parking and Direction to Pursue Interim Housing, an RV Buyback Program and Designated Oversized Vehicle Permit Parking on City Streets and Find that These Actions are Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15262.F
Report
REPORT IN BRIEF
This report provides an update on the City’s efforts to explore and implement a Safe Parking program to address vehicular homelessness, consistent with prior City Council direction and adopted housing policies. Over the past two years, staff evaluated potential public and private sites, developed a permitting framework, conducted outreach to faith-based organizations, issued a Request for Information and capital grant program, and coordinated with regional partners. Based on this work, staff determined that a safe parking program is not viable nor effective in the City. Available sites are limited, not suitable for large-scale implementation, and would not support a cost-effective program. In addition, no external funding sources have been identified to offset the significant capital and ongoing operating costs.
Given these constraints, staff recommends a shift in strategy. Rather than pursuing safe parking, staff recommends a multi-pronged approach led by the development of an interim housing project (such as tiny homes) as the primary intervention, supported by an RV buy-back program paired with housing assistance, and a permitted oversized vehicle parking program.
These options are presented in order of priority based on their ability to produce measurable housing outcomes, better utilize City resources, and be implemented in the City. Staff recommends that Council direct staff to:
• Conduct a feasibility analysis for an interim housing (tiny homes) project
• Identify and designate an area for permitted parking; and
• Pursue funding opportunities for an RV buy-back program.
Staff will return to Council with implementation plans, cost estimates, and funding sources for consideration.
BACKGROUND
In 2020, the City Council approved the 2020 Housing Strategy, which identified the development of a Safe Parking program as an action.
In 2022, the City Council added Supporting the Unhoused Community as a Council Strategic Priority. Council also authorized street outreach services to augment other social service programs in the County and to assist unhoused individuals in learning about and accessing services.
In December 2023, the City Council adopted the 2023-2031 Housing Element of the General Plan (RTC No. 23-1120). Remaining programs from the 2020 Housing Strategy were incorporated into the Housing Element, including Program H34 - Safe RV Parking, which directs staff to work with local service providers to encourage the creation of a Safe RV parking program for the unhoused community.
In November 2024, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 3233-24, which amended Article 5 of Title 19 of the Sunnyvale Municipal Code to allow Safe Parking as a primary or ancillary use at specified sites. (RTC No. 24-1171.) Additionally, Council directed staff to pursue implementing a Safe Parking Pilot program on public property, return to Council with program details, and prepare a Budget Issue for consideration with the FY 2025/26 Recommended Budget for a General Fund grant for a nonprofit or faith based organization to provide a Safe Parking Program on private land. Council ultimately approved an appropriation of $100,000 for capital grants to support the establishment of a Safe Parking Program on private land, however no interest has been expressed in a grant to date.
Staff has also begun work on a Strategic Plan to Address Homelessness. An initial draft was presented to Council on December 2, 2025 (RTC No. 25-0110) where Council directed staff to conduct community outreach. That plan is scheduled to return to council later this year.
Sunnyvale’s most recent Point in Time count reflected 328 people experiencing unsheltered homelessness with 75% living in vehicles (about 250 people). The City also receives regular requests for service regarding RV parking in both commercial and residential neighborhoods. These requests are consuming staff and financial resources with little progress towards resolution.
EXISTING POLICY
2020 HOUSING STRATEGY - ESTABLISHMENT OF A SAFE RV PARKING PROGRAM - Identify potential improvements to existing housing programs as well as approaches to increase affordable housing stock and improve housing affordability in the City.
GENERAL PLAN - HOUSING ELEMENT
GOAL HE-5 EQUAL HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES AND SPECIAL NEEDS - Promote equal housing opportunities for all residents, including Sunnyvale’s special needs populations, so that residents can reside in the housing of their choice.
Policy H-5.13 Housing and Services to Address Homelessness. Participate in the County Collaborative on Affordable Housing and Homeless Issues to support its efforts to prevent and end homelessness. Facilitate and sponsor the provision of permanent supportive housing for homeless people. Support local service providers that offer facilities and support services to homeless individuals and families, and persons at risk of homelessness.
H32. Programs to Address Homelessness. Continue to provide funding for programs that seek to prevent and end homelessness and provide supportive services to homeless and at-risk clients. Continue to implement programs such as WorkFirst Sunnyvale and Tenant-Based Rental Assistance. Using new funds such as Permanent Local Housing Allocation and HOME-ARP, create and fund new programs that support the City’s residents who are experiencing homeless or at risk of homelessness.
• Objective: Provide annual funding for homeless programs and at-risk households to serve at least 150 households per year. Implement new rental assistance program for seniors experiencing homelessness.
• Policy(ies) Implements: H-5.13
• Timeframe: Implement new funding sources in 2023, ongoing once implemented.
• Responsible Department or Agency: Community Development Department, Housing Division
H34. Safe RV Parking. Work with local human service providers to encourage the creation of a Safe RV Parking program for the unhoused community.
Objective: Support the establishment of a safe RV parking program and identify at least one potential site.
• Policy(ies) Implements: H-5.13
• Timeframe: Commence study in 2023 and implement by 2025
• Responsible Department or Agency: Community Development Department, Housing Division
Council Policy 5.1.3 Human Services
POLICY PURPOSE: The City of Sunnyvale recognizes that the supportive human services programs of the Federal, State and County governments do not fully meet the needs of all its population. The City, therefore, shall make its best efforts to provide supplemental human services, which include but are not limited to the emergency services, senior services, disabled services, family services and youth services.
Council Strategic Priority: Support the Unhoused Community
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This action being considered does not require environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it involves only a feasibility or planning study for possible future actions which have not been approved, adopted, or funded. (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15262.)
DISCUSSION
At the November 12, 2024 Council meeting, Council approved the first reading of the Safe Parking Ordinance and directed staff to pursue implementing a Safe Parking Pilot program on public property and return to Council with program details (RTC No. 24-1131). Council also directed staff to prepare a Budget Issue for consideration with the FY 2025/26 Recommended Budget for a General Fund grant to a nonprofit or faith-based organization to provide a Safe Parking Program on private property.
Since then, staff have pursued these directives, along with additional actions, to advance Safe Parking opportunities in Sunnyvale. The following outlines the steps staff have taken to date.
Sunnyvale Efforts to Address Vehicular Homelessness Through Safe Parking
Exploration of Public Land for Safe Parking Sites
A multi-disciplinary team of City staff met throughout 2025 to explore all City-owned sites in as potential opportunities to host Safe Parking. The general criteria that staff used to identify potentially viable sites included a minimum of 1.5-acre lot size for RV parking, smaller lots for vehicular parking, and whether the site met the Safe Parking ordinance infrastructure requirements, such as the ability to get potable water access, space for temporary restrooms, lighting, proximity to services, ingress and egress, and generally neighborhood compatibility.
The review included all parks, administrative properties, parking lots, and open space. Staff considered the factors mentioned above as well as complexity (e.g. are there existing tenants or facilities that would have to be relocated) and cost.
Through an examination of all City sites, staff identified two viable City-owned sites, each with its own unique challenges, discussed below. A map of each site can be found in Attachment 1 to this report.
Site #1 Civic Center Campus: The site is located in front of the Charles Street Gardens. The site would not be suitable for RV parking due to its residential location, but may hold 25 passenger vehicles. The site is close to downtown, nearby amenities, and public transportation. There may be a suitable location for a program office and temporary hygiene facilities on-site, which would reduce the number of vehicles served. This area is currently occupied by several vehicular unhoused and is the primary location for the Dignity on Wheels mobile shower and laundry program. It is important to note that this area is adjacent to the downtown specific plan boundary where the densification has begun to surface concerns from the surrounding neighborhood about quality-of-life issues. Additionally, library users and library staff have also expressed concerns. It is likely that siting a safe parking program at this location would be met with significant concerns from the neighbors and library users.
Site #4 1240 Fair Oaks Way: The site is located adjacent to the State Route 237 freeway off-ramp, near a light rail train stop and about one block from a grocery store and other dining locations. It may accommodate up to 15 RVs or 40 cars. There may be a suitable location for a program office and temporary hygiene facilities on-site, which would reduce the number of vehicles served. This location lacks existing infrastructure, such as potable water, requiring significant capital funding to prepare the site. This site is across from Traditions townhome development. As with the site at the Civic Center, this site would also likely draw concerns from the neighborhood.
Additional 2025 Safe Parking Initiatives by Staff
Development of the Safe Parking Permitting Program
In late 2025, City staff developed the new Safe Parking large and small permitting program. Safe Parking permitting can now be done through the City’s online permitting system. To date, no permits have been applied for or issued.
Safe Parking Request for Information (RFI)
In July 2025, City staff released a Safe Parking RFI to encourage interested private property owners to bring forth any potential sites that could be considered for Safe Parking. The RFI sought sites that were flat, at least 1.5 acres in size, and ideally had infrastructure such as potable water, lighting, and power. The solicitation was open for more than one month and received no responses.
Safe Parking Capital Grants Program
In September 2025, City staff released the City’s first Safe Parking Capital Grants Program. This program offers community-based organizations one-time capital funding for site repairs, upgrades, or permitting fees to develop a safe parking program. Grants are awarded in amounts ranging from $5,000 to $50,000. To date, there has been minimal interest in the program, despite various outreach and marketing attempts to community-based organizations.
Outreach to Faith-Based Organizations
Over the past two years, City staff have actively engaged the faith-based community through a variety of efforts to better understand their concerns and interest in hosting a Safe Parking site on private property. This outreach has included one-on-one meetings, a Safe Parking focus group, targeted communications to faith leaders, and participation in a countywide faith-based convening in 2025, which was attended by several Sunnyvale faith leaders. Expressed concerns have included the cost of ongoing operating of sites (including expanded insurance requirements), as well as getting the congregation aligned on supporting the program.
Engagement With Other Local Jurisdictional Leads
Over the past two years, City staff have also engaged with neighboring jurisdictions and the County of Santa Clara’s Office of Supportive Housing to discuss Safe Parking approaches. These conversations have uncovered that some other neighboring cities have also struggled with site identification, ongoing operating funding, and low housing outcomes. The County has also indicated that they are not funding any new Safe Parking programs at this time due to their own budget constraints.
Safe Parking Recommendation
Overall, staff does not recommend moving forward with a Safe Parking program.
The analysis demonstrates that Safe Parking cannot be implemented on a scale that would meaningfully address the level of need in the City. The only remaining viable site could accommodate about 15 RVs, compared to an estimated 150 Sunnyvale-affiliated households currently living in vehicles.
Also, Safe Parking programs require significant upfront capital investment and ongoing operating costs, with limited opportunities for external funding. Smaller sites are generally not financially feasible given the infrastructure and staffing requirements. As a result, a program at the scale of the remaining site would have limited impact relative to its cost. Capital costs are estimated at $2 million to $5 million, with annual operating costs between $350,000 and $900,000, depending on site size and amenities. Furthermore, staff has not identified any viable external funding sources to support either capital or ongoing operating costs of a Safe Parking program. Without outside funding, these costs would need to be fully borne by the City.
Vehicular dwelling and homelessness require a multi-pronged approach; however, not all strategies; produce the same level of impact. Based on staff’s analysis, interim housing represents the most effective path to moving individual out of vehicles and into stable housing while RV buy-back programs and permitted parking programs can help manage existing conditions and support transitions.
The following programs are recommended in order of priority.
Alternative Recommended Programs to Address Vehicular Dwelling and Homelessness
1. Interim Housing or Micro-Communities (e.g., Tiny Homes)
Program Overview: Interim housing programs, including tiny home communities, provide private indoor living spaces paired with onsite supportive services to help individuals transition to permanent housing. These non-congregate models typically include shared amenities such as kitchens, restrooms, and laundry facilities, and operate under Housing First principles with low-barrier access and trauma-informed case management. The length of stays vary, with many programs having longer lengths of stay to ensure stabilization and more positive housing outcomes.
Micro-communities are an emerging model that utilize tiny homes while allowing residents to stay for an extended period without a fixed time limit, as long as they comply with program rules. This approach supports individuals in stabilizing at their own pace and pursuing longer term housing opportunities, such as a Permanent Supportive Housing, which can take time to secure. Some micro-communities charge a program fee, such as 30% of income, to help offset ongoing operating costs. Residents typically have tenant protections, balancing housing stability with structured community guidelines.
Interim housing is increasingly recognized at the state level as a key strategy for reducing unsheltered homelessness. Compared to vehicle-based programs, interim housing more effectively addresses key barriers to successful housing outcomes such as instability, lack of privacy, and inconsistent access to services. By moving individuals out of vehicles and into a stable indoor environment, these programs can significantly improve well-being and increase the likelihood of successful transitions to permanent housing.
Program Example - LifeMoves Mountain View: LifeMoves Mountain View is a 100 unit interim housing community serving approximately 124 individuals at a time, including single adults and families, and serving over 350 individuals annually. Residents receive intensive case management, housing navigation, employment support, and other services, with an average length of stay of 120 days. According to LifeMoves’ FY2025 Impact report, 68% of families and couples and 26% of single adults exiting interim housing moved directly into permanent housing, with an overall permanent housing placement of 46%, exceeding Santa Clara County’s 43% benchmark. Additionally, approximately 94% to 96% of clients who transitioned to permanent housing remained housed after 12 months, indicating strong long-term housing stability. Capital costs for this project were approximately $13.4 million, excluding land, with annual operating costs of approximately $3.7 million (2020 dollars), about $37,000 per unit. While the program has been successful for participants, there is a tendency for people waiting for a unit to congregate near the project.
Program Example- City of Sacramento
The City of Sacramento has four interim housing sites they refer to as “micro-communities.” In early 2025, the Sacramento City Council made the decision to start charging residents a fee, 30% of income to live at the sites after an initial grace period of 90 days at move in.
The change to start charging fees was framed as a way to help offset operating costs and create a sustainable housing model. It is estimated that the City would spend $85,000 per tiny home unit annually.
Each micro-community will offer roughly 40 tiny homes at 120 square feet with shared bathrooms, showers, laundry, and cooking facilities. Stays will be non-time limited.
Sunnyvale Example:
Potential Cost: For a 40-unit interim housing site serving adults without minor children, capital costs have not yet been determined and require detailed analysis. However, based on comparable projects, costs are expected to be significant and will require focused evolution to determine feasibility, funding strategy, and long-term sustainability. The program can be geared specifically to prioritize households who live or work in Sunnyvale.
Ongoing operating costs for this type of program are estimated at $113 per unit, per night. To serve 40 individuals, annual operating costs are projected at approximately $1,649,800 (about $41,000 per unit). Cost discrepancies between this Sunnyvale example and the LifeMoves Mountain View site reflect a smaller scale, including serving only adults without minor children in the Sunnyvale example.
Potential Outcomes: Interim housing has demonstrated strong outcomes in supporting individuals experiencing vehicular homelessness to exit and remain stably housed. Programs like San Jose’s Emergency Interim Housing and Mountain View LifeMoves’ interim supportive housing programs report permanent housing placement rates of approximately 46% to 48%, exceeding traditional shelter benchmarks of approximately 30% and generally outperforming local safe parking outcomes, where approximately 30% of participants transition to a next housing step and a smaller share exit to permanent housing. By transitioning individuals from cars and RVs into private lockable units with on-site services, interim housing improves physical and mental well-being by providing safety, hygiene, and stability, which in turn supports engagement in services and successful housing placement.
Potential Implementation Timeline: Regional examples indicate that interim housing projects require substantial planning, coordination, and construction prior to opening. The overall implementation timeline is estimated at approximately 2 to 5 years, inclusive of site selection, design, environmental review, and funding availability.
Potential Funding: The City’s Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA) funds could be used to provide case management services at an interim housing site. Additionally, other sources, such as the state’s Encampment Resolution Funding (ERF), was just released at the end of March 2026 and can be considered for a share of the capital and operating costs (short term operating- 2-3 years). Other city sources such as Housing Mitigation Funds or Prohousing Incentive Program funds may also be considered for site development or other one time use. . The City would need to contribute additional capital costs and ongoing operating funding annually at a cost to be determined. The City could also consider the micro-community model to offset ongoing operating costs.
2. RV Buy-Back Program Paired with Housing Assistance
Program Overview: RV buy-back programs provide financial incentives, combined with sustained outreach and case management, for individuals experiencing homelessness to relinquish recreational vehicles in exchange for transitioning into low-barrier, temporary, or permanent housing.
Program Example - City of Berkeley RV Buyback Program: Berkeley piloted a cash-for-RV buyback program in early 2025 at a known RV encampment on 2nd Street, offering approximately $175 per linear foot (roughly $5,250 for a 30-foot vehicle) to residents who voluntarily relinquished their vehicles and moved into a non-congregate motel shelter. Of the 32 vehicles specifically targeted for buyback, 29 were relinquished (91%), and 38 of the 61 total encampment residents were placed into shelter. At the time of reporting, 4 residents had transitioned to permanent housing, with the remaining sheltered residents still working toward longer-term housing solutions.
The program underwent an independent evaluation, published in March 2026, by the UCSF Benioff Homelessness and Housing Initiative (Attachment 2). Berkeley is exploring replication at additional RV encampment sites due to its preliminary success demonstrated by the high uptake, encampment resolution, and early permanent housing moves. The buyback program was funded through California’s Encampment Resolution Funding (ERF) program for $200,000 in addition to a partnership with a local non-congregate shelter where former RV dwellers were placed.
Sunnyvale Example:
Potential Cost: Implementation would require staff resources to develop and administer the program, as well as funding for other associated costs (i.e. towing). Additional funding would be required for direct cash incentives to eligible RV owners based on defined criteria (e.g., vehicle condition and residency). For illustrative purposes, using a cash value of approximately $175 per linear foot, a 30-foot RV would equate to an estimated incentive of $5,250. If 40 RV households were served, total incentive funding would be approximately $210,000. Overall program costs are estimated at approximately $350,000 to include towing costs and program administration.
Potential Funding: State Encampment Resolution Funding (ERF), as mentioned above, can be used to fund a comprehensive RV Buyback and relocation program in addition to a portion of the interim housing costs. Staff recommends this as one-to-two-year pilot program if ERF funding was awarded.
Program Outcomes: This program would directly reduce the number of large vehicles stored on public streets, prevent the continued use or resale of unsafe vehicles, and improve public health, safety, and environmental conditions. This program may also be paired with an interim housing program to provide a direct path into a non-congregate shelter and longer-term stability. This program is most effective when paired with available interim housing or shelter options, as it provides a pathway for individuals to transition out of vehicles while ensuring vehicles are permanently removed from use
Potential Implementation Timeline: Local examples indicate that an RV buy-back program requires early planning and staff coordination. The overall implementation timeline is estimated at approximately one year, inclusive of funding availability, planning, identifying RV encampments, outreach, and education.
3. Designating Certain Streets for Permitted RV Parking
Another recommended strategy would be to designate specific City streets where oversized vehicles could park with a permit. This program could be adapted for oversized vehicle dwellers who are not experiencing homelessness in addition to those who are. The City’s existing street outreach team could provide ongoing services to those who need them. City staff would need to further develop the permitting program and ordinance.
Program Example - City of Mountain View:
Mountain View currently operates a program similar to the permitted street parking approach described above, and staff are exploring how to implement such a program in Sunnyvale.
Potential Cost: Staff time to develop, operate, and enforce the program. Cost considerations could include regular trash pick-up and mobile pump-outs.
Program Funding: $1.5 Million in City funds would be needed for the program's initial start-up and ongoing operations (assuming trash pick-up and mobile pump-outs, in addition to permitting and enforcement.)
Program Outcomes: A permitted parking approach could enable improved monitoring, coordination with outreach services, and more consistent enforcement. Other outcomes include reducing the number of RV encampments throughout the City and improving public health, safety, and environmental conditions. This program can be combined with both the interim housing and RV buy-back strategies, forming a multi-pronged approach to address vehicular homelessness. While this program does not directly reduce homelessness, it provides a tool to better manage impacts on neighborhoods while longer-term solutions are implemented.
Potential Implementation Timeline: The overall implementation timeline is estimated to be around six months to a year to develop the ordinance and program.
Staff recommends that Council direct staff to move forward with a feasibility analysis of an interim housing project at the 1240 Fair Oaks site, and that if found feasible, staff return to Council with a cost estimate and a funding and implementation plan by the end of September 2026. Staff will include this as a new workplan item under the Housing Solutions strategic goal area. Additionally, it is recommended that council direct staff to explore funding and program options for an RV buyback program and a program to designate areas in the City right of way for permitted RV parking, with priority given to permitted RV parking. These would also be added to the workplan. When returning with information on interim housing, staff will include the workplan items that will be deferred to accommodate these new efforts.
FISCAL IMPACT
While there is no direct fiscal impact related to the approval of the report it is certain that there will be one time and ongoing costs associated with any of the listed programs. For each program, some potential funding sources were identified above. However, the practical reality is in order to maintain a sustainable solution, ongoing stable funding is required. Additionally, in order to meet our mission of delivering exceptional services, significant ongoing funding must be committed. The Council Service Level Set Aside contains approximately $1.2 million per year for new or increased services. As part of the action in this report, staff recommends that Council tentatively commit the remainder of this funding source to funding ongoing services related to supporting operating a permanent project at the Fair Oaks Site.
PUBLIC CONTACT
Public contact was made by posting the Council meeting agenda on the City's official-notice bulletin board at City Hall, at the Sunnyvale Public Library and in the Department of Public Safety Lobby. In addition, the agenda and this report are available at the City Hall reception desk located on the first floor of City Hall at 456 W. Olive Avenue (during normal business hours), and on the City's website.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Direct staff to develop an interim housing site on City-owned land, an RV buyback program, and a permitted RV parking program on designated City streets to address vehicular dwelling and homelessness and return to Council with implementation details and funding recommendations for approval, and find that these actions are exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15262.
2. Direct staff to prioritize select programs to address vehicular homelessness and return to Council for funding approval.
3. Alternative 1 or Alternative 2 with modifications.
4. Take no action at this time.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Recommendation
Alternative 1: Direct staff to develop an interim housing site on City-owned land, an RV buyback program, and a permitted RV parking program on designated City streets to address vehicular dwelling and homelessness and return to Council with implementation details and funding recommendations for approval, and find that these actions are exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15262.
JUSTIFICATION FOR RECOMMENDATION
Staff’s recommendation reflects a strategic shift toward solutions that can meaningfully reduce vehicular homelessness. While safe parking was previously identified as a potential strategy, staff’s analysis demonstrates that it is not feasible to implement at a scale or cost that would produce measurable outcomes.
Addressing vehicular homelessness requires a multi-faceted approach, as no single program can effectively meet the diverse needs of individuals and families living in vehicles or fully address the associated community impacts. People experiencing vehicular homelessness are not a monolithic group - some may need short-term stabilization, while others require ongoing supportive services or pathways to permanent housing. At the same time, the impacts on neighborhoods, public spaces, and infrastructure vary by location and circumstance. As a result, a range of strategies is necessary to provide both immediate relief and longer-term solutions.
Recommending multiple programs allows the City to respond more effectively and strategically by combining interventions such as interim housing, an RV Buyback program, and permitted oversized vehicle street parking. This layered approach broadens the City’s ability to connect individuals to the services and housing opportunities best suited to their needs, while also mitigating community impacts.
Levine Act
LEVINE ACT
The Levine Act (Gov. Code Section 84308) prohibits city officials from participating in certain decisions regarding licenses, permits, and other entitlements for use if the official has received a campaign contribution of more than $500 from a party, participant, or agent of a party or participant in the previous 12 months. The Levine Act is intended to prevent financial influence on decisions that affect specific, identifiable persons or participants. For more information see the Fair Political Practices Commission website: www.fppc.ca.gov/learn/pay-to-play-limits-and-prohibitions.html
An “X” in the checklist below indicates that the action being considered falls under a Levine Act category or exemption:
SUBJECT TO THE LEVINE ACT
___ Land development entitlements
___ Other permit, license, or entitlement for use
___ Contract or franchise
EXEMPT FROM THE LEVINE ACT
___ Competitively bid contract*
___ Labor or personal employment contract
___ Contract under $50,000 or non-fiscal
___ Contract between public agencies
_X_ General policy and legislative actions
* "Competitively bid" means a contract that must be awarded to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder.
Staff
Prepared by: Jocelyn Vidales, Housing Specialist I
Reviewed by: Annette Tran, Human Services Manager
Reviewed by: Amanda Sztoltz, Housing Officer
Reviewed by: Trudi Ryan, Director, Community Development
Reviewed by: Dennis Jaw, Assistant Director of Finance
Reviewed by: Matt Paulin, Director of Finance
Reviewed by: Connie Verceles, Deputy City Manager
Approved by: Tim Kirby, City Manager
ATTACHMENTS
1. Maps and List of City-Owned Sites Considered for Safe Parking
2. Berkeley RV Interim Evaluation Final 3.31